MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6988103749

Working Time and Flexibility in Canada

2016· article· en· W6988103749 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiscrimination and Equality Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)JurisdictionLegislatureWork (physics)Working timeState (computer science)Legislation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is a federal state and, under its constitution, legislative jurisdiction over labour and employment is vested primarily in its provinces and territories. As a result, there is no generally applicable national regime regulating hours of work, but rather a patchwork of laws with limited reach. It is not possible to cover all these laws in a brief overview and so we have chosen to focus on the laws of Ontario, Canada’s most populous province. However, it is also fair to say that while provincial laws vary, the law of Ontario reflects the general pattern of hours of work laws in Canada. As will be seen, while the development of the hours of work regime was initially driven by the demand to protect employees from long hours, it has also accommodated the demand of employers for flexibility and arguably, in recent years, flexibility for employers has come at the expense of protection for employees.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicDiscrimination and Equality LawFrench-language works237,207